Replies

Spoken like someone who's never actually had to hire people. There's tons of things you look for in a resume. First is basic presentation how readable is the resume. Then you get into qualifications, which isn't just years of experience but how closely it relates to what's being done. Of course you also have to throw people out that are over qualified, everybody's got a budget to match if this applicant is going to blow your budget to pieces you simply can't hire them. And you've got to get PAST that stage to get called. I never had time to call 45 people and tell them I wouldn't be bringing them in for an interview. Hell I barely had time to call 5 people and schedule an interview. The more desperately you need to hire someone the harder it is to find the time.

As I started this off with, these hiring percentages give NO meaning to whether there is a shortage or not. Every business is going to have similar percentages of applicants hired. Hell even McDonalds rejects 90% of applicants. That's just how it is.

Everything I said on the other thread I stick to, and I invite people on this thread to check it out. Somebody already provided a link to zazona's page. The DB has TONS of apparent duplicates. These duplicates COULD be from the original DOL database, they COULD be from whatever procedure zazona is using to make the copy, or the COULD be from the procedure they're using to grab the data for user queries. If you don't know that then it's YOU that is LIEING about your supposed experience. Any query of this database will show these duplicates and further investigation will show that there's no procedural reason for these (ie you'll see multiple identical applications for 30 H1Bs from 1 company and another company with a single application for 100, clearly demonstrating that 30 is not the single application cap). You're "explanations" ran the gamut from terrorism to accusing me of being a shill. My explanation is simple: the DB sucks, I place no blame but I do say the company PRESENTING the data bears responsibility for explaining the problems to those querying it.

I DO know there are few qualified applicants because I've gone through the hiring process from both sides. Now stop this abusive insulting crap and start acting like a reasonable adult. The owners of this site have requested people not drag arguments from one thread to the other, they've asked people to be respectful and not start flame wars. Right now you're in violation of all three of these requests. Grow up, chill out, and stop being such a cry baby.

Everything I said on the other thread I stick to, and I invite people on this thread to check it out.

Ok, let's check it out..

discostu's "proof"

Somebody already provided a link to zazona's page. The DB has TONS of apparent duplicates.

It has been demonstrated on that thread that it is common for companies to submit multiple applications with the same job title and start date. There are NOT necessarily any duplicates, no matter what you attempt to say to the contrary.

These duplicates COULD be from the original DOL database, they COULD be from whatever procedure zazona is using to make the copy, or the COULD be from the procedure they're using to grab the data for user queries.

An exact copy is a FILE copy, not a database record copy. You DO know the difference don't you? If there were query errors, they'd be consistant across queries which use the same search criteria. Again, this is not the case. Of course, you should know that too.

If you don't know that then it's YOU that is LIEING about your supposed experience.

Do you know what the acronyms UT, IT, and ST signify? What about regression testing, what is that?

Any query of this database will show these duplicates and further investigation will show that there's no procedural reason for these (ie you'll see multiple identical applications for 30 H1Bs from 1 company and another company with a single application for 100, clearly demonstrating that 30 is not the single application cap).

Why doesn't someone ask the DOL what it means? It IS their data in case you forgot that simple fact.

You're "explanations" ran the gamut from terrorism to accusing me of being a shill.

No, I said that fraud is rampant in the immigration system, as that is what the GAO had found. It is the GAO that said that this leaves the door open to terrorism. I simply explained that "extra" work visas could be sold on the blackmarket. ONE of the possibilities is that a terrorist COULD easily purchase one of these visas. I didn't say that "terrorism" is the CAUSE of these so-called duplicate records, which is what you consistently insist that I said.

My explanation is simple: the DB sucks, I place no blame but I do say the company PRESENTING the data bears responsibility for explaining the problems to those querying it.

You CONSISTENTLY attempt to discredit the data. That is why I suspect your motives here are far removed from an innocent curiosity or sincere interest in the validity of the data. Your ONLY motive appears to be to discredit the information in ANY manner possible.

The owners of this site have requested people not drag arguments from one thread to the other, they've asked people to be respectful and not start flame wars.

I'm simply not buying your qualifications as a QA engineer. Hey, maybe you ARE a manager, as I HAVE seen a few of them that shouldn't have had the position they did. There are also administrative positions that require little or no knowledge technically, but rarely is that true in QA. I'm not trying to start a war, I'm simply stating my observations. If you simply gave your opinion, perhaps I'd give you a pass on your prior assertions. BUT, you are indicating to all of us that you are involved in QA. What IS it exactly that you test?